4.37 killed the AMRAAM
-
@VIPER-0 Wasn’t there a MiG-29 leak recently?
-
@sungad said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@Mav-jp So does the AI “thought process” go
“My RWR says I have a Fox-3 inbound, better GTFO”
or
“I get another air-to-air spike… judging by the context, I think that’s probably a missile”But yes, it woul be cool to see some input from real MiG pilots on whether they can tell if a spike is a Fox-3.
it’s based on RWR detection and yes we assume it can detect that this is a FOX3
-
@sungad said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@VIPER-0 Wasn’t there a MiG-29 leak recently?
@sungad said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@VIPER-0 Wasn’t there a MiG-29 leak recently?
The manuals for 29 and su27 are manuals that have been circulating on the net for years. but they are for exploitation, not for combative use.
-
@Mav-jp said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@VIPER-0 said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@Xeno said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@Mav-jp
Hmm iirc @VIPER-0 may have some clues. In general redfor could use some love, but I know time and docs a re quite limited …@Xeno said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@Mav-jp
Hmm iirc @VIPER-0 may have some clues. In general redfor could use some love, but I know time and docs a re quite limited …Yes brother and not only were there limitations of the documents and if not so well that within the branch itself where one serves there are access limitations, an example the crew members have documentation and the technical personnel do not have access to that type of documentation and but hey, you make friends and you’ve been working there for a long time and you begin to understand how the system works, you begin to understand what the procedures are, what kind of technical preparation the pilots carry out, and moreover, the friendships that you make and learn and learn. Yes, really, there is a lot of limitation with the documents. The Red Forces are not really open and there is no free circulation. really a lot of mystery and they are still using Soviet-style preparation schemes even the combative use remains the same as when the cold war.
a lot of european countries have had mig21 and mig29 relics …
it’s right. Former Warsaw Pact countries continue to exploit this technique. but every day they will be less, since the spare parts and parts are no longer produced, the stock from when the Soviet Union continues to be consumed.
-
@Mav-jp said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
[…]
a lot of european countries have had mig21 and mig29 relics …Point is Mig-29 is still in service in quite few countries, heck even few ot them still fly “The Pencil” aka Mig-21, ‘tho’ heavily upgraded (Romanian and Indian ones ).
That’s why it might be difficult to make somebody talk about combat systems of those platforms. Maybe some friend of a friend … once BMS will be more popular in the Central/East European countries.
I wonder if the guy who made SAM simulator has knowledge of red-side RWR systems.On the side note it’s kinda weird situation, because I’m not sure against whom the secrecy is protecting from. It’s easier to list countries that had no access to those planes than those who had.
Russia, China, India, ex-soviet states, ex-WarsawPact (including Germany), lots of Middle-Eastern, SE Asian, African and few South/Central American counties were/are operators of those planes.
US got few Fishbeds in '70s and in '90 obtained Fulcrums from Moldova, Israel IIRC had some captured Mig21s and leased MiG-29 from Poland for detailed evaluation in mid-90’s.They knew those planes to the point, they were able to offer upgrade package for both 21 and 29. Rest of the NATO countries should be well aware of their capabilities trough international exercises and pilot exchange programs. -
@Mav-jp said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@sungad said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@Mav-jp So does the AI “thought process” go
“My RWR says I have a Fox-3 inbound, better GTFO”
or
“I get another air-to-air spike… judging by the context, I think that’s probably a missile”But yes, it woul be cool to see some input from real MiG pilots on whether they can tell if a spike is a Fox-3.
it’s based on RWR detection and yes we assume it can detect that this is a FOX3
What I mean is that the RWR on a real MiG cannot directly tell the difference between an AMRAAM and a fighter radar AFAIK. I’m not sure if an AMRAAM would give a missile launch alert, but I suspect it doesn’t because to the RWR it should look more like a (normal) fighter radar than a SARH guidance signal (correct me if I’m wrong).
According to the internet (and DCS), the SPO-15 can only differentiate between these types:
- fighter radar
- long-range radar
- mid-range radar
- short-range radar
- early warning radar
- AWACS
It can display type and direction (usable for frontal hemishpere threats, rear aspect threats are only displayed as “somehwere behind you”) for two threats and signal strength, height (above/co-altitude/below) and launch warning only for the primary threat.
The DCS (Su-25T) manual states that rapidly increasing signal strength is an indication for a Fox-3, but this is nowhere near as simple as seeing an ‘M’ on the RWR.
I strongly suspect that BMS does not model these limitations. I don’t demand that it does, I’m just trying to explain what @SpbGoro meant.
-
@sungad said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@Mav-jp said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@sungad said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@Mav-jp So does the AI “thought process” go
“My RWR says I have a Fox-3 inbound, better GTFO”
or
“I get another air-to-air spike… judging by the context, I think that’s probably a missile”But yes, it woul be cool to see some input from real MiG pilots on whether they can tell if a spike is a Fox-3.
it’s based on RWR detection and yes we assume it can detect that this is a FOX3
What I mean is that the RWR on a real MiG cannot directly tell the difference between an AMRAAM and a fighter radar AFAIK. I’m not sure if an AMRAAM would give a missile launch alert, but I suspect it doesn’t because to the RWR it should look more like a (normal) fighter radar than a SARH guidance signal (correct me if I’m wrong).
According to the internet (and DCS), the SPO-15 can only differentiate between these types:
- fighter radar
- long-range radar
- mid-range radar
- short-range radar
- early warning radar
- AWACS
It can display type and direction (usable for frontal hemishpere threats, rear aspect threats are only displayed as “somehwere behind you”) for two threats and signal strength, height (above/co-altitude/below) and launch warning only for the primary threat.
The DCS (Su-25T) manual states that rapidly increasing signal strength is an indication for a Fox-3, but this is nowhere near as simple as seeing an ‘M’ on the RWR.
I strongly suspect that BMS does not model these limitations. I don’t demand that it does, I’m just trying to explain what @SpbGoro meant.
SPO 15 actually detects only frequencies through the quadrant antennas that are around the aircraft, they are like little fish eyes. the lamps that have the spo15 indicator below only reveal frequency bands, knowing the bands we can say that a pitbull missile enters an awacs, but that has its limits and conflicts when there are bands or frequencies that excite the system but do not. is what is happening. For example, the condition that the amraam band lamp comes on in a pitbull can be given, but it is not that, it is an F4 phantom in hard lock. Even centimeter band targeting radars can trigger an AWAC alert when no such threat exists. The use of SPO15 is limited to a complex analysis of the tactical technical situation by the pilot.
-
@sungad said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@Mav-jp said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@sungad said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@Mav-jp So does the AI “thought process” go
“My RWR says I have a Fox-3 inbound, better GTFO”
or
“I get another air-to-air spike… judging by the context, I think that’s probably a missile”But yes, it woul be cool to see some input from real MiG pilots on whether they can tell if a spike is a Fox-3.
it’s based on RWR detection and yes we assume it can detect that this is a FOX3
What I mean is that the RWR on a real MiG cannot directly tell the difference between an AMRAAM and a fighter radar AFAIK. I’m not sure if an AMRAAM would give a missile launch alert, but I suspect it doesn’t because to the RWR it should look more like a (normal) fighter radar than a SARH guidance signal (correct me if I’m wrong).
According to the internet (and DCS), the SPO-15 can only differentiate between these types:
- fighter radar
- long-range radar
- mid-range radar
- short-range radar
- early warning radar
- AWACS
It can display type and direction (usable for frontal hemishpere threats, rear aspect threats are only displayed as “somehwere behind you”) for two threats and signal strength, height (above/co-altitude/below) and launch warning only for the primary threat.
The DCS (Su-25T) manual states that rapidly increasing signal strength is an indication for a Fox-3, but this is nowhere near as simple as seeing an ‘M’ on the RWR.
I strongly suspect that BMS does not model these limitations. I don’t demand that it does, I’m just trying to explain what @SpbGoro meant.
and do not be guided by DCS or any of its manuals, many things are poorly implemented, even in its best modules such as the Mig21, which has an APU on the starter and the post combustion can be connected with the flaps in landing position.
-
Just as a general rule around here, DCS cannot be trusted as a reference…
-
Why???
someone bothered reality
-
@VIPER-0 Okay, so the real SPO 15 is even worse than in DCS?
-
@sungad said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@VIPER-0 Okay, so the real SPO 15 is even worse than in DCS?
positive.
RL’s is more complicated. pilots have to assess the threats and in the theater of operations that is flown. but if you want a headache, work with a SPO-10 -
@sungad - True that…and it’s a very rash assumption to think that bogey RWRs are as “smart” as the Viper’s, as you point out.
OTOH, I don’t think there is any way to tell that a bogey AI is reacting based on his RWR by inspection. There is probably much more going on with the AI than that, and the mech may not even have anything to do with an RWR - you don’t strictly have to model systems to model behavior.
-
@VIPER-0 said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
Why???
someone bothered reality
I believe that was me…fat thumb
-
@VIPER-0 said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
if you want a headache, work with a SPO-10
-
@CriticalMass said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@VIPER-0 said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
Why???
someone bothered reality
I believe that was me…fat thumb
-
@sungad said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@VIPER-0 said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
if you want a headache, work with a SPO-10
I never understood why the Soviets the most important instruments their faces were the smallest, let’s say in spo-10 it is small like the face of a wristwatch, like the hydraulic pressure indicator on the booster and main systena. but other instruments such as the ash-1 clock, their dials are the size of a frying pan lid. The same in the transport avacion the torque meter that indicates the power that the engine is generating is just as small.
-
@VIPER-0 Priorities of course…
-
@WPNS24 - you know, after sleeping on this observation a couple nights, I have to ask - aren’t the AI bogeys subject to the same blackout/redout model that us Viper drivers are?
Seems to me that this bogey should have blacked out at the very least…and broken his jet…resulting in “a kill’s a kill”.
What the hey?..
-
@Stevie see other thread on bogey/wingman G forces … they’re an illusion